Another fffing speeding ticket

[DodgyAgent]

30 is still dangerous, its a limit not a max.

so define what speed is dangerous then.

[FiveTimes]

so define what speed is dangerous then.

Come on DA, it depends on situations.... use a little bit of common sense.
I no angel, but I do watch the limits in 30/40 zones.

[DodgyAgent]

Come on DA, it depends on situations.... use a little bit of common sense.
I no angel, but I do watch the limits in 30/40 zones.

Yes but do you obey them? It is all very well some of you sanctimonious hypocrites saying "its the law" but speed limits bear no relation to safe driving.
No one unless they can hand on heart say that they have never broken a speed limit has a right to lecture others on breaking limits.

[FiveTimes]

Yes but do you obey them? It is all very well some of you sanctimonious hypocrites saying "its the law" but speed limits bear no relation to safe driving.
No one unless they can hand on heart say that they have never broken a speed limit has a right to lecture others on breaking limits.

I always try to obey them like I said in 30/40 zones, and I'm not lecturing about "its the law...".

My definition of safe driving is "driving within the limits, and observing the situations around and being able to react".

If you've been busted, just hold your hands up and take the rap...

I was doing 60 on a dual carriage way, didn't realise it was a 50 and a front facing camera was just around a bend, I was angry for a while, but I got away with it. I would have taken the points and learned from it.

[DodgyAgent]

I always try to obey them like I said in 30/40 zones, and I'm not lecturing about "its the law...".

My definition of safe driving is "driving within the limits, and observing the situations around and being able to react".

If you've been busted, just hold your hands up and take the rap...

I was doing 60 on a dual carriage way, didn't realise it was a 50 and a front facing camera was just around a bend, I was angry for a while, but I got away with it. I would have taken the points and learned from it.

Why do we accept slavishly the laws that are laid down by other people?

Speeding laws are made for the convenience of those who make and enforce them, whereas laws about violence, rape and theft are carefully designed to protect people and to allow for all sorts of complex eventualities.

99 times out of a hundred speeding convictions are victimless crimes that harm no one, and bear no correlation to dangerous driving. Speed limits do perform a useful function to help police exercise discretionary judgements as to whether to prosecute someone who is driving dangerously, or they feel a need to make an example of someone, or in placing a speed camera at a dangerous junction.

The problem is that speeding has become arbitrary in its own right as a means purely to generate more revenue. Cameras remove any discretionary judgement as to whether or not an individual is driving dangerously or not.

If breaking the speed limit is such a big deal then why on earth do they allow cars to be sold that are capable of breaking 70 mph? Why not stick limiters on all cars as they do with HGVs as a start?

We all break the speed limit, and sometimes we do so when it is dangerous, and it is these dangerous moments that we should be prosecuted for, not for driving at 100 mph on an empty motorway at 3.00 am in the morning.

[NickFitz]

Yes but do you obey them? It is all very well some of you sanctimonious hypocrites saying "its the law" but speed limits bear no relation to safe driving.
No one unless they can hand on heart say that they have never broken a speed limit has a right to lecture others on breaking limits.

To paraphrase your attempted justification of your criminal acts:

It is all very well some of you sanctimonious hypocrites saying "its the law" but the Licensing Act bears no relation to safe recreational use of alcohol.

No one unless they can hand on heart say that they have never had a drink before they were eighteen has a right to lecture others on selling booze to 12 year olds.

[NotAllThere]

Speed doesn't kill ? Where have you dragged that from ?Of course it does, would you like someone to drive past a school in a 30 zone doing over and above the limit.... of course speed kills....

Speed doesn't kill. Inappropriate driving kills. This may involve driving at a speed not appropriate to the conditions.

[NotAllThere]

We all break the speed limit, and sometimes we do so when it is dangerous, and it is these dangerous moments that we should be prosecuted for, not for driving at 100 mph on an empty motorway at 3.00 am in the morning.

Or 50mph at 2am on a straight section of dual carriageway in the middle of the Cambridgeshire countryside. ( Posted limit 40mph, and speed cameras every few feet ).

[NickFitz]

Why do we accept slavishly the laws that are laid down by other people?

Because we wish to live in a society based on the rule of law, in the hope that this will protect us (to at least some extent) from those who would do us harm.

If you don't wish to accept that you have to keep up your end of the social contract, then move to an Afghan village where you won't have to slavishly accept laws controlling your driving, any more than your neighbours will have to slavishly accept laws prohibiting them from beheading you.

[DodgyAgent]

[QUOTE=NickFitz;337142]To paraphrase your attempted justification of your criminal acts:

[QUOTE]
It is all very well some of you sanctimonious hypocrites saying "its the law" but the Licensing Act bears no relation to safe recreational use of alcohol.

No one unless they can hand on heart say that they have never had a drink before they were eighteen has a right to lecture others on selling booze to 12 year olds.


I have never sold or even given alcohol to a 12 year old. In breaking this law there is a victim, unlike when speeding laws are broken.